RWS 100 Project 2 Prompt: Constructing an Account of an Author,

Gathering Information, and Managing Sources

Due: Tuesday, 10/27

Anticipated length: 5-6 pages*

Description/Key Learning Outcomes:

In the two texts, “Apes with Self-Esteem” and “Survival of the Kindest,” primatologist Frans de Waal explores the connection between animal and human behavior. In these particular selections, he investigates two seemingly contradictory animal behaviors—the drive for dominance and altruism—in an effort to shed light on the human condition.

For this paper you will write a formal academic essay of approximately 5–6 pages where you construct an account of de Waal’s project and argument and carry out small, focused research tasks to find information that helps clarify, illustrate, extend, or complicate that argument.In other words, you will translate his argument into your own words and analyze how outside texts change the way you understand his argument. Note: You may choose either text, or utilize both, but your selection should be clear when you articulate an account of his argument.

Evaluation Criteria: Successful papers will

  1. Signal the topic, and give some indication of how the paper will proceed;
  2. Describe de Waal’s project, showing the argument he makes;
  3. Smoothly integrate information and evidence from at least two sources that connect to claims of your chosen de Waal text(s)
  4. Analyze HOW and WHY these connections illustrate, clarify, extend, or complicate claims found in de Waal’s text(s);
  5. Address an academic audience unfamiliar with de Waal’s text and secondary sources;
  6. Use an effective structure that carefully guides the reader from one idea to the next. Pay particular attention to body paragraphs, making sure you have strong topic sentences that relate to de Waal’s claims and transitions between your paragraphs (and ideas) as illustrated in Chapter 8 of They Say/I Say.
  7. Comment on how this article is significant—what difference it might make to readers.
  8. Be thoroughly edited so that sentences are readable and appropriate for an academic paper, including meticulous attention to grammar as well as MLA formatting & citation.
  9. Writing mechanics:
  10. Paragraphs focus on single ideas Transitions between paragraphs are smooth
  11. Quotations and references from text are properly integrated and accounted for. Remember to consult the templates in They Say/I Say when composing your sentences.
  12. Grammar, spelling and punctuation are correct

Paper utilizes proper MLA format (See Keys for Writers)

Definition of Terms:

  1. Illustrate: to provide examples, additional evidence, cases or arguments that help explain a position; to present material that illuminates or supports what an author argues (but may not be explicitly mentioned by that author).
  2. Clarify: to bring into focus, to help explain, illuminate, or elucidate. Providing evidence, examples, stories, cases or support that make something easier to understand or that sharpen the point made.
  3. Extend: to advance, develop, expand or take further some element of an existing argument. Extending an argument involves presenting additional evidence or reasons that are in line with the original argument but go beyond it.
  4. Complicate: to present evidence, arguments or information that is at odds with an author’s position, and which suggests the position needs to be revised or qualified (i.e. that its scope or degree of certainty needs revision, or that exceptions have not been considered.) Complicating an author’s argument is not quite the same as disagreeing with it, although disagreement may be involved. It usually involves suggesting that an author has not dealt with the full complexity of an issue, has failed to consider relevant evidence, or that there is a gap, shortcoming or limitation in an author’s account. Complicating an argument may involve exposing problems, contradictions, or presenting counterexamples and counterarguments that challenge some part of the argument.

Note: As with most sets of terms, there is some overlap between them. For example, something that illustrates an argument may also clarify it. An element of an argument can thus do more than one thing. The important thing is to try to figure out the general relationship between texts/parts of texts.

Suggested Breakdown / Organization of Essay for Project 2:

Possible Outline (optional): This is not required, but may give you an idea of what I think goes into a solidly structured paper and helpful for those who are having trouble beginning.

Intro: Note how much of this was already covered in your précis, so this should be fairly easy for you to write. Think of the introduction as an inverted triangle, you’re starting broad, and whittling down to a specific point: your purpose statement.

You are welcome to use the introduction outline that I gave you in Project 1

  • Introduce the topic with a general statement (optional).
  • Introduce the rhetorical context of either/both “Apes with Self-Esteem” or “Survival of the Kindest”
  • (think Rhetorical Situation: author, text, context, audience (implied), purpose)
  • Briefly introduce de Waal’s project & argument.
  • Introduce YOUR purpose and project.
  • Signal to your reader what you will analyze and hint at your organization.
  • Only thought-out and highly developed purpose statements will receive full credit.

Body, Part 1: Construct an Account of de Waal’s Project & Argument

Your entire first paper was an account of Pinker’s argument, and here you are doing a pared-down version of the same thing for de Waal. Focus on what you think are the most important claims/evidence.

  • Identify and explain de Waal’s main claims
  • Critically discuss de Waal’s reasons and use of evidence used to support his claims.

Body, Part 2: Integrate and Analyzesources that clarify, illustrate, extend, or complicate de Waal’s argument

This is the part of the paper where analysis is king. All paragraphs should be highly structured. Summarize information for an unfamiliar reader, but emphasize analysis.

  • Identify two to three of de Waal’s claims that can be related to outside texts.
  • You must locate two texts on your own to use. They may be taken from the list provided on Blackboard.
  • Discussing one claim of de Waal’s at a time, thoughtfully identify and explain how the secondary text clarifies, illustrates, extends, or complicates de Waal’s claim.
  • Add thorough analysis and commentary about the relationship between the two sources.
  • Consider and explain what the connection is, illustrate HOW they are connected in that way, and discuss the significance of their connection (the WHY).
  • When commenting on what the significance is, consider the following:
  • What effect does the correlation have? Is there an effect on the audience? de Waal’s credibility? The strength of his argument?
  • Use appropriate examples and quotes from de Waal and the other texts to support your analysis, and comment on HOW these quotes support your analysis. (Another way of saying, make sure your quotes are in quotation sandwiches.)

Conclusion: If your introduction is an inverted triangle, your conclusion is a triangle—you start at the end of the evidence and then branch out to the larger implications of your analysis.

  • This is the “so what?” part of your essay. This is where you need to tie everything together!
  • Consider as a whole what the other texts DO to de Waal’s argument.
  • Comment on the effectiveness of de Waal’s argument and strategies.
  • Comment on how this argument has affected you as an individual and/or how it might affect other viewers.

1